A few thoughts about infinity

[bennett oppel]

I've noticed that people can get a bit boggled by infinity but you can reduce the infinite to a finite number of concepts. Take the language that I am using, it has a finite number of letters and grammar but it can generate an infinite amount of structure depending on how its used. A better example would be a game engine. The game engine can generate an infinite number of computer games but is itself only a finite structure (a number that is interpreted by a system). The game engine is more primary than the structure it generates. So for people who want to appeal to the infinite just be aware that the finite structure that generates it is much more fundamental without any need for infinite this and infinite that except as possibilities from the underlying finite reality. Note this does not have to be finite in time because you can generate an infinite amount of time by looping a system.

[Nahm]

@bennett oppel

Nice. Thought arose...were you to then measure said loop, you would find it to be impossible. A half measure would say nothing, and a double measure would appear to say something, while the default ‘go to’ would be ‘time’. 

[bennett oppel]

4 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@bennett oppel

Nice. Thought arose...were you to then measure said loop, you would find it to be impossible. A half measure would say nothing, and a double measure would appear to say something, while the default ‘go to’ would be ‘time’. 

Not sure what you mean by this. The loop would be finite in the moment but go on for ever.

[Nahm]

7 minutes ago, bennett oppel said:

Not sure what you mean by this. The loop would be finite in the moment but go on for ever.

Yes, I think we’re saying the same thing, for ever and forever withstanding.

[Moksha]

Finity is an illusion. Even the space between the first two letters of your post is infinitely divisible.

[bennett oppel]

3 minutes ago, Moksha said:

Finity is an illusion. Even the space between the first two letters of your post is infinitely divisible.

You can do this however using a finite system of rules. Even the sentence you just wrote encapsulates this. I'm not saying you can't perform an operation forever but i could write a computer program in a finite amount of space than did this. The finite is a seed for infinite potential.

Edited November 3, 2020 by bennett oppel

[Moksha]

1 minute ago, bennett oppel said:

You can do this however using a finite system of rules. Even the sentence you just wrote encapsulates this. I'm not saying you can't perform an operation forever but i could write a computer program in a finite amount of space than did this.

Finite amount of space? How many moments are in a minute?

[bennett oppel]

4 minutes ago, Moksha said:

Finite amount of space? How many moments are in a minute?

I can quantise time just by using a single cubic unit that tiles forever. As for moments that depends what clock your using

[Moksha]

4 minutes ago, bennett oppel said:

I can quantise time just by using a single cubic unit that tiles forever. As for moments that depends what clock your using

What is a single cubic unit? Can you name anything that is actually finite, i.e., indivisible?

[bennett oppel]

12 minutes ago, Moksha said:

What is a single cubic unit? Can you name anything that is actually finite, i.e., indivisible?

Its a cube. A cube can tile to create  space perfectly with no gaps. You would just have one finite  cube of space to generate all space. A line of length 1 is a finite object i can measure and image. I'm not saying you can't  divide the line forever or even tesselate the line forever but the line generates those quantities from a finite starting point. It encapsulates the infinite even though it can be measured as being finite from a certain perspective. This is the point I'm trying to make the line is finite but has an infinite potential. Technically you can create everything from the line apart from colour if you know what operations to use. As an example of something that is actually finite how about a word. I can only divide it up into letters, no more no less.

Edited November 3, 2020 by bennett oppel

[Moksha]

Do you believe the starting point of any line is finite? Use the finest pencil on the planet, and that apparent starting point can still be subdivided, infinitely. How small is the smallest starting point?

Any word can be subdivided into letters, which in turn can be subdivided into the lines used to create them, which (see above).

Infinity is awesome

[bennett oppel]

2 minutes ago, Moksha said:

Do you believe the starting point of any line is finite? Use the finest pencil on the planet, and that apparent starting point can still be subdivided, infinitely. How small is the smallest starting point?

Any word can be subdivided into letters, which in turn can be subdivided into the lines used to create them, which (see above).

Infinity is awesome

I'm talking about a 1d line which is finite in length but can tile or be divided forever. A finite seed with infinite potential. The line though is the fundamental thing because it creates everything. As for your letters turning into lines good luck pronouncing them

[Moksha]

Even the idea of finity in length is an illusion. At what finite point does the line start, and at what finite point does it stop? The length cannot be ultimately defined, because the points cannot be defined. All we're talking about is dividing infinity by infinity, which is undefined.

[bennett oppel]

1 minute ago, Moksha said:

Even the idea of finity in length is an illusion. At what finite point does the line start, and at what finite point does it stop? The length cannot be ultimately defined, because the points cannot be defined. All we're talking about is dividing infinity by infinity, which is undefined.

If I have one apple how many apples do I have. The apple is a unit of something , i.e an apple, its not an infinite number of apples unless I grow an infinite number of apples from that one apple. The line begins at its beginning and ends at its end what else would it do?

[Moksha]

The apple is the illusion. It is not really a solid object. It is a miniscule amount of matter, mostly held together by electron wave energy. We can agree to call it "one apple", but in the ultimate sense the apple and everything else is divisible. The only nothing that cannot be divided is nothing itself.

[bennett oppel]

11 minutes ago, Moksha said:

The apple is the illusion. It is not really a solid object. It is a miniscule amount of matter, mostly held together by electron wave energy. We can agree to call it "one apple", but in the ultimate sense the apple and everything else is divisible. The only nothing that cannot be divided is nothing itself.

I can go below zero by just measuring a point as a meter. Its a visualisation trick which works quite well for me although it creates a very strange image. Similarly i can measure a meter as a point and truncate an infinite shape into something I can image as well. I'm not going to get into whether apples are illusions or not, that was not the point of the topic. As for "nothingness" well you can have less than it depending on how you measure it. As an example if we measure "nothingness" using symmetry then it has an infinite value. The universe though has  finite degrees of symmetry and is hence less than nothing from a particular perspective, hence my theory that the universe is less than nothing rather than more which explains why it can exist

Edited November 3, 2020 by bennett oppel

[Moksha]

"Visualization trick"...kinda my point

Anything can be artificially defined by scale, then infinitely subdivided. That doesn't mean the artificial definition is real. You're just arbitrarily cutting it out of infinity, then acting surprised when you get infinity out of it

By definition, something with an infinite value cannot be measured.

Edited November 3, 2020 by Moksha

[bennett oppel]

Just now, Moksha said:

"Visualization trick"...kinda my point

Anything can be artificially defined by scale, then infinitely subdivided. That doesn't mean the artificial definition is real. You're just arbitrarily cutting it out of infinity, then acting surprised when you get infinity out of it

By definition, something with an infinite value cannot be measured. It is undefined.

I'm talking about something my brain does automatically, which is to produce high def images whenever I want,sort of a gift so to speak. I'm not cutting anything out of infinity. I'm saying that you can create an infinite number of things from a finite structure. After all we are using a finite number of letters and grammar to communicate complicated ideas and theoretically the rules of languages and letters could encapsulate an infinity of things. Your getting bogged down with things that don't really matter to the point I was trying to make.

[Moksha]

By creating a finite structure, you are cutting that structure out of infinity. It's an illusion of scale. If I arbitrarily define the tiniest cube as being dimensionally 1 foot, I am excluding all of the smaller cubes I could have defined instead. The definition itself is completely arbitrary.

Definition is the illusion. There is no ultimate definition, only unity.

Edited November 3, 2020 by Moksha

[bennett oppel]

3 minutes ago, Moksha said:

By creating a finite structure, you are cutting that structure out of infinity. It's an illusion of scale. If I arbitrarily define the tiniest cube as being dimensionally 1 foot, I am excluding all of the smaller cubes I could have defined instead. The definition itself is completely arbitrary.

Definition is the illusion. There is no ultimate definition, only unity.

So what came first, the alphabet or the books they created later? With just 1 number and a few operations I can create all numbers. with a powerful enough game engine I could create all computer games. The thing that creates everything is the primary thing not the infinity that follows it. The cube is dimensionless, it does not matter what measurement you give it technically, either way I can image it so I don't care No matter what scale you give the cube it can still create all space.